Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-09-2011, 07:40 AM   #121
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by yusuf Quote
oh okay I agree but may be you missed that part where I said light was changing fast between the shots as clouds moving.
Maybe you missed the part... no, wait, I forgot to type it.. I was gonna say "The changing light could certainly explain color differences, but not the DOF oddness."

06-10-2011, 01:09 AM   #122
Veteran Member
Abbazz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Aotearoa
Posts: 530
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
Actually, I think that it is the ability of the FA43 and the other FA Limiteds to render subtle transitions in tone and color that gives their images such a life-like, 3-D quality. This is the true source of the "pixie dust" and is what separates them from other fine lenses. (Also superior construction, of course.)
The ability to render subtle transitions is certainly not one of the characteristics of the FA43. This lens does indeed have lots of microcontrast, but great microcontrast and subtle transitions sounds like an oxymoron.

Cheers!

Abbazz
06-11-2011, 07:03 PM   #123
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by Abbazz Quote
The ability to render subtle transitions is certainly not one of the characteristics of the FA43. This lens does indeed have lots of microcontrast, but great microcontrast and subtle transitions sounds like an oxymoron.

Cheers!

Abbazz
I guess that everything is relative. Compared to the DA Limited series, I would say that the FA Limiteds are very subtle.

Rob
06-12-2011, 07:35 AM   #124
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
I guess that everything is relative. Compared to the DA Limited series, I would say that the FA Limiteds are very subtle.

Rob
I would suggest that what you prefer about the FA ltds. is their colour palette, which is less saturated than the DA ltds (or DA lenses in general).

06-12-2011, 11:40 AM   #125
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
I would suggest that what you prefer about the FA ltds. is their colour palette, which is less saturated than the DA ltds (or DA lenses in general).
Actually, I think that the difference shows in monochrome images as well. But I do like the softer colors of the FA Limiteds. Mind you, I am not knocking the DA Limiteds. They are also fine lenses, but different.

Rob
06-12-2011, 11:44 AM   #126
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by Abbazz Quote
The ability to render subtle transitions is certainly not one of the characteristics of the FA43. This lens does indeed have lots of microcontrast, but great microcontrast and subtle transitions sounds like an oxymoron.

Cheers!

Abbazz
BTW, I don't recall using the term "microcontrast" in this thread. But I agree that the FA Limiteds have it in abundance. I did not realize that this precludes rendering of subtle tonal transitions. How is this so?

Rob
06-12-2011, 11:46 AM   #127
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
Actually, I think that the difference shows in monochromatic images as well. But I do like the softer colors of the FA Limiteds. Mind you, I am not knocking the DA Limiteds. They are also fine lenses, but different.
Never though you were knocking them.

However, I would imagine that if you took an image from a DA ltd, turned it monochromatic, and then turned down the blues, you would see a similar/identical look to the FA ltds. The differences are going to be in sharpness and bokeh rendering.

The DA ltds retain the full colour spectrum much more fully than the FA ltds. In fact, the entire DA line does this better than the FA ltds. I think it has something to do with digital sensors vs. film, where the DA line is optimized to reproduce the world in the way that a Bayer Filter sees the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter), where the FA ltds are optimized for film.

This would explain the *general* differences I see in the way that FA lenses render vs. DA lenses. This difference extends out of the limited line!

I think about this stuff like a computer nerd. It's all signal processing. If you have a clean sample, you can manipulate the data with little signal degradation / artefact production. To my eyes, it seems that this was the design goal of the DA ltds (to be as friendly to PP as possible).
06-12-2011, 01:49 PM   #128
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Abbazz Quote
The ability to render subtle transitions is certainly not one of the characteristics of the FA43. This lens does indeed have lots of microcontrast, but great microcontrast and subtle transitions sounds like an oxymoron.

Cheers!

Abbazz
Hmmm - which definition of microcontrast are you using, here ^^ ?

"...the ability of the lens to differentiate between smaller and smaller details of more and more nearly similar tonal value. This is also referred to as "microcontrast." The better contrast a lens has (and this has nothing to do with the light*dark range or distribution of tones in the final print or slide) means its ability to take two small areas of slightly different luminance and distinguish the boundary of one from the other."

From this link.

.

06-12-2011, 01:56 PM   #129
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Hmmm - which definition of microcontrast are you using, here ^^ ?
My guess is that most people say "sharpness" when they mean "microcontrast" when referring to the FA ltds. It's this detail retention that makes the FAs pop.
06-13-2011, 12:20 AM   #130
nah
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Westminster, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 280
I haven't read through the thread, but I just received my 43 ltd and it's pretty awesome wide open! I don't know why people think it soft wide open, maybe bad copies??

I had the FA previously and didn't like it's performance wide open, pretty soft. Only stopped down to 2.8 would it perform well.
06-13-2011, 12:37 AM   #131
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by nah Quote
I haven't read through the thread, but I just received my 43 ltd and it's pretty awesome wide open! I don't know why people think it soft wide open, maybe bad copies??
Exactly my thought, mine is sharp from wide open.
06-13-2011, 07:05 AM   #132
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
I think about this stuff like a computer nerd. It's all signal processing. If you have a clean sample, you can manipulate the data with little signal degradation / artefact production. To my eyes, it seems that this was the design goal of the DA ltds (to be as friendly to PP as possible).
Me, too. That's how I see exposure - the "correct" exposure (in camera) is the one that acquires the most information possible, not one that renders an average 18% gray across the scene. You can adjust everything else in post.
06-13-2011, 08:35 AM   #133
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
How would the early version of the 43 ltd, pre-1999 change the decision in the process of picking the FA 50 or 43?
06-13-2011, 02:09 PM   #134
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
QuoteOriginally posted by Emacs Quote
mine is sharp from wide open.
QuoteOriginally posted by nah Quote
I just received my 43 ltd and it's pretty awesome wide open! I don't know why people think it soft wide open, maybe bad copies?
Perhaps also due to being slightly off on calibration. Lenses with such large apertures need to be brutally accurate in focusing to be sharp right where it's intended.
06-13-2011, 02:22 PM   #135
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
Perhaps also due to being slightly off on calibration. Lenses with such large apertures need to be brutally accurate in focusing to be sharp right where it's intended.
Mine just flat out misses once in a while. Not near as often as I did manual focusing, but once in a while, it just misses.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
43mm, 50mm, f1.4, f1.9, fa, fa 50mm f1.4, images, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
sigma 50mm to fa 43mm gab124 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 04-03-2011 04:04 PM
43mm/1.9 ltd vs 50mm/1.4 SMC Takumar d.bradley Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 02-13-2010 04:03 PM
Shooting Hummingbirds? I prefer 50mm MoparFreak69 Photographic Technique 7 08-19-2009 10:54 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:49 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top